Leofwine_draca BLOODRAYNE was bad enough as it was, but BLOODRAYNE 2: DELIVERANCE is something else. Another godawful horror flick directed by German 'auteur' Uwe Boll, this singularly fails as a film thanks to the absolutely excruciating production values, or rather lack of them.There isn't much link to the first film aside from the titular character; even Kristanna Loken doesn't return, replaced instead by the instantly forgettable Natassia Malthe. The story has been removed from its medieval origins and instead takes place in a western town and the whole film is full of western clichés. There's some very small novelty from seeing Michael Pare playing Pat Garrett but the rest of the film is dull of long, dull dialogues and very little in the way of horror or action.Even worse, for some reason Boll decides to shoot 95% of this film at night, in almost pitch black scenes with very little lighting. Thus much of the action (and the characters) remain almost invisible for long stretches of time. Needless to say that the script is a mess relying on clichés to get by, and the use of a 10 second piece of music over and over and OVER again is exceptionally annoying!

insomniac_rod "Bloodrayne 2" should be considered as an inept, dull, pointless, cheesy, but worst of all; boring movie.The movie's plot should be taken as a joke but no, it's supposed to be taken seriously. Western plot mixed with vampiric thematic that once had to do with Nazis? You bet.The movie takes plenty of time to finally get in action. There's absolutely no dynamic, interesting plot or dialogs. No action, no good gore, no scares, no suspense. NOTHING. This is a waste of film and shouldn't even be considered as a Horror movie.The acting and f/x are painful while the cinematography is truly for direct to video standards.Uwe Boll is a master on his own. And that means he's the mater of crap horror cinema.

Flak_Magnet Unlike the first Bloodrayne, this direct-to-video sequel fails to deliver laughs as an unintentional comedy. I think we got one good chuckle out of it, but spent the majority of the time rolling our eyes and counting the minutes. As a plus, I think this is one of the worst Westerns I've ever seen and its also one of the lamest vampire movies. Unfortunately, though, its just too lame and unfunny to be worth most peoples' time. Expect to see the juvenility and incoherence that defines a Uwe Boll project, but also a drab story that limps along with the help of tired clichés. It isn't really campy; it just sucks. You can skip this one; its totally forgettable. ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet

trashgang The fact that the original Bloodrayne wasn't received with a cheer they decided to make a second part. We already know that it is tricky to make a franchise out of a movie, mostly the second part can't do what the first part did. Sometimes the second part is better than the first and sometimes the second part has nothing to do with the first part. Guess what, this second part has nothing in common with the first part, even Rayne is played by another actress. The only thing that refers to the first part is a necklace. Where did it go wrong, first with the DVD cover, you see Rayne in a sexy outfit, well, she never wears it in the movie. but the worst thing is the script, suddenly we are in the wild west. Not exactly a place were you would suspect a vampire. That alone, the wild west, could have been used to make an original movie but it isn't the script that is extremely bad, they also make use of real names like Billy the Kid who is a vampire, can it get worser. Billy is hunted by Pat Garret, a fact, but he is a vampire hunter. Man, this is trash. Billy a vampire, be real, do they think we go for it? And to get it worser out of the blue comes Rayne to help Pat. Anyway, no gore or bloody scenes, just one slash, the rest of the Billy the Kid gang is shot down, even Rayne doesn't use her anti vampire weapons that much. I just couldn't believe that they could make such a flick. If you want to see the wild west in horror watch Ghostttown instead